Conselho Nacional Contra Discriminação

In this session I will examine the establishment of the Conselho Nacional Contra Discriminação (CNCD), created in 2001 to implement the resolutions of the World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, held by the United Nations in Durban in the same year.¹⁹ In this conference, the Brazilian delegation proposed the inclusion of a provision condemning sexual orientation discrimination, in line with the commitments made on the PNDH I.²⁰ Although this provision was rejected, it instigated international and national discussions on the matter.

The idea of such proposition was a result of the FHC administration’s evolving engagement with civil society. During the preparation for the conference, the government instituted a committee formed by civil society members, including the LGBT activist Cláudio Nascimento, and organized a number of national and regional seminars in order to build a common agenda. Nascimento explained during an interview with Daniliauskas (2011) that he managed to persuade the government to include sexual orientation discrimination by arguing that it fits in the category of ‘related intolerance’. Many Brazilians are both black and homosexuals and thus suffer multiple types of discrimination: racism and homophobia.

This initiative was approved in the Latin American pre-conference²¹, even though it failed to be included in the Durban’s final resolution.²² Nonetheless, many scholars (Correa, 2009; Daniliauskas, 2011; Facchini, 2009) consider that Brazil’s biggest achievement was to promote an international debate on sexual orientation discrimination, which was not possible in previous conferences, such as the International Conference on Population and Development (Cairo, 1994) and the IV World Conference on Women (Beijing, 1995).

Durban also had a direct impact in the country: the establishment of the CNCD, proposed by activists during the conference’s preparation with the express intent of ending multiple types of discrimination and violence (Gómez, 2010). Indeed, the CNCD was

19 See the decree nº 3.952, of 04 October 2001, available at:

http://portal.mec.gov.br/seesp/arquivos/pdf/dec3952.pdf (accessed 12.03.12).

20 See A/CONF.189/12, available at: http://www.un.org/WCAR/aconf189_12.pdf (accessed 12.03.12).

21 The conference was held in Santiago, Chile, in 2000 and the resolution approved became known as

Declaración de Santiago, available at:

http://www.oas.org/dil/esp/afrodescendientes_tematica_declaracion_conferencia_regional_santiago_chile_2 000.pdf (accessed 12.03.12).

22 See the final resolution, available at: http://www.un.org/WCAR/durban.pdf (accessed 25.02.12).

36 composed of several NGOs, including representatives of many LGBT organizations, and became the main intersection between the government and the LGBT movement in the beginning of the Lula administration. Eventually, it was responsible for the creation of the Programa Brasil sem Homofobia, theme of discussion in the next chapter.

37

CHAPTER 4

The Lula administration (2003-2010)

While the 1982 elections can be considered a decisive point for the political emergence of the LGBT Movement in Brazil, as shown in Chapter 2, the AIDS crisis is seen by many as a “watershed moment” in the history of LGBT politics in the country (Miskolci, 2011), mainly for approximating the civil society and the state, particularly the Federal Government. As seen in Chapter 3, Brazilian activists introduced an evolving rights-based discourse to the public health debate throughout the 90s and successfully pushed the boundaries of subjectification, transforming the public policy domain into a field where the human rights of LGBT people can be claimed and recognized (Dehesa, 2010).

Previously I discussed how these rights were institutionalized by the FHC administration, first through a public health discourse with the Programa Nacional de DST/AIDS and the adoption of neoliberal adjustment policies, and later through a human rights discourse with the Programa Nacional de Direitos Humanos I and II, and the creation of the Conselho Nacional Contra Discriminação. This reflects a much broader scope in the federal government’s agenda for LGBT people and an increasing process of their recognition as rights-bearing citizens.

The Lula administration, which also governed the country for two mandates (from 2003 until 2010), accelerated this process by changing completely the focus of LGBT politics into the human rights field and establishing a series of human rights public policies for LGBTs under the authority of the Secretaria Especial de Direitos Humanos. These policies will be the core of the present chapter’s discussion and are listed as follows: the Programa Brasil sem Homofobia in 2004, the Plano Nacional LGBT in 2009 and Programa Nacional de Direitos Humanos III in 2010.²³ I will employ the following research methods, content analysis and discourse analysis, while examining the actual content of these policies,

23 Other policies were established in other ministries and secretariats after the Programa Brasil sem Homophobia was launched in 2004. However, for the purpose of this dissertation, I will focus only on the ones which were the responsibility of the SEDH.

38 secondary data from interviews performed by Daniliauskas (2011) and primary data from the interviews I carried out in January 2012 and other official documents I collected. ²⁴

The specific objective of this chapter is to analyze the roles of the LGBT Movement and the Federal Government in the creation of the above mentioned policies. I will also discuss some relevant changes in the government’s structure which enabled interactions between these two actors, as well as the political arrangements that brought those policies to life. It is important to notice that I do not intend to provide a detailed account of the content of all the actions proposed by those policies or focus extensively on their implementation. My aim is rather to examine the discursive development of the Brazilian government on LGBT rights during the Lula administration through those policies.

4.1 The human rights discourse of the Lula administration

In order to analyze the public policies enacted by the Lula administration to the LGBT community, it will be necessary to draw attention to the antecedents of this government, since such policies were not implemented all of a sudden. As Howlett and Ramesh (2003) points out, when a new administration takes power, it does not simply start from scratch. There are several factors that facilitate or hinder policy reforms, as well as institutions, agencies and officials that come from previous administrations. Additionally, there are national and international agreements, long-term budget plans and other policies enacted previously which might have an impact on the new government’s reforms. All these factors will be explored in this chapter.

The FHC administration initiated a human rights tradition in the second half of the 90s, inserting the country in a broader international human rights debate. This certainly have internal impacts, as discussed in the previous chapter, which culminated with the creation of the Conselho Nacional Contra Discriminação (CNCD) in 2002. The arrival of Lula in the government represented a big step forward in the country’s fight for human rights and, particularly, LGBT rights. Not only because it was the first left-wing government since

24 See section 1.3 from Chapter 1 for a detailed explanation on my interviews and data collection.

39 formal democracy was reinstalled in 1986²⁵ but also because Lula, former Workers Party (PT) leader and trade union militant, had been one of the key protagonists in the opposition against the military dictatorship and raised the human rights flag throughout his entire political trajectory (Parana, 2009).

It might be appropriate to remember here, in line with Chapter 2, that Lula and the PT supported the LGBT Movement innumerous times since the 80s, and even thought the latter did not align completely to any political party in the beginning, as part of their state-directed strategies, they became good political partners over time. The friendly relationship they developed reached a new level when Lula ran for presidential elections in 2002. That moment, I suggest here, marked a rupture from the activists’ non-alignment strategies since they explicitly expressed their ideological affinity with the PT, collecting over two hundred signatures for a manifesto in support of Lula.²⁶ Right after he took office, the same activists presented the new government with a list of legislative and public policy demands²⁷, setting precedents for the creation of the Programa Brasil sem Homofobia.

The achievements observed in the Brazilian policy-making domain were definitely facilitated by some structural reforms made by Lula and the human rights approach of his administration. In 2003, he created special secretariats directly connected to the Presidency of the Republic²⁸: the Secretaria Especial de Direitos Humanos (SEDH), a Secretaria Especial de Política para as Mulheres (SPM) e a Secretaria Especial da Promoção da Igualdade Racial (SEPPIR). This ministerial reform represents Lula’s intentions to give human rights issues more relevance in the government’s structure and frame these issues as presidential matters. These intentions were made even clearer in 2010 when a law turned the special secretariats into ministries, giving them more political and budgetary autonomy. ²⁹

Moreover, the creation of these secretariats reaffirmed Lula’s unwavering commitment to human rights, particularly to women’s rights and racial equality. LGBT issues and others

25 As debated in Chapter 2, left-wing parties, especially the PT, were more supportive of LGBT rights during the re-democratization process of the 80s and, supporting Marsiaj’s (2006) assertion that such rights are more likely to be incorporated into leftist party agendas in Brazil, than into those of right-wing parties.

26 Information provided by activists-members of the PT’s LGBT sectorial group in interview with me.

27 Ibid.

28 See Law no. 10.683, of 28 May 2003. Available at:

http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/2003/L10.683.htm (accessed 14.03.12).

29 See Law nº 12.314, of 19 August 2010. Available at: http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2007-2010/2010/lei/l12314.htm (accessed 14.03.12). This law also altered the names of the secretariats, removing the word “special”.

40 were allocated within the SEDH. Daniliauskas underscores that such secretariats refer to the constitution of new political subjects and targets of Lula’s public policies, namely the Women’s Movement, Black Movement, LGBT Movement, inter alia. Their creation can be further interpreted as a response to the historical demands of such movements and represents Lula’s main priorities: to improve social conditions and eliminate inequalities in the Brazilian society, “through a political structure of dialogue, participation and partnership” (2011: 74).

This strategy was evident on the great number of national conferences held by Lula, revealing the government’s engagement in a politics that intensify direct, participatory and popular democracy³⁰. Daniliauskas (2011) highlights two important aspects of these conferences: they represent a decision-making strategy that prioritize civil society involvement in state tasks, reinforcing previously discussed neoliberal trends initiated by the FHC administration, and include the three levels of the Brazilian government (municipal, state and federal), reaching the society more deeply. The propositions that come out from these conferences are used to elaborate the government’s human rights programs and plans.

For the purpose of this dissertation, I will focus later only on the 2008 National LGBT Conference, which laid the basis for the 2009 National LGBT Plan.

4.2 The creation of the Programa Brasil sem Homofobia

The Brasil Sem Homofobia (BSH), launched by the Federal Government in 2004, was the result of its steady engagement with the LGBT Movement and it would not have been possible without the joint work among the Programa Nacional DST/AIDS of the Ministry of Health (PNDA), the Secretaria Especial de Direitos Humanos of the Presidency of the Republic (SEDH) and the Conselho Nacional Contra Discriminação of the Ministry of Justice (CNCD).

In my interview with the LGBT Movement’s leader Toni Reis, he explained that activists were very unsatisfied with the previous government’s slow implementation of the Programa Nacional de Direitos Humanos (PNDH) and used the space they occupied in the CNCD to demand Lula’s compliance with the promises made to them during the 2002

30 From 1941 until 2010, 113 national conferences were held in Brazil, of which 72 were convoked by the Lula administration. Available at: http://www.secretariageral.gov.br/.arquivos/arquivos-novos/CONFERENCIAS%20NACIONAIS__Tabela_1941_%202010_26abril2010.pdf (accessed 15.03.12).

41 elections. In response, the Human Rights Secretary at that time, Nilmário Miranda, convoked a meeting with LGBT activists, who then proposed the creation of a set of policies exclusively to the LGBT community that would be permanent and transversal to all ministries - something not accomplished by the FHC administration, as observed by some activists in my interviews. Miranda then nominated Ivair Augusto, advisor of the SEDH and Executive-Secretary of the CNCD, to be the interlocutor between activists and the ministries and conduct the negotiations for the formulation of such policies.³¹

In order to facilitate these negotiations, the SEDH turned to the PNDA requiring assistance, since it had been quite successful in establishing objective partnerships with LGBT activists during the FHC administration. Toni Reis confirmed to me that the model of public-private partnerships developed through HIV prevention served not only as an instrument for the improvement of activists’ advocacy skills and technical training but it extended the scope of their action to other areas, such as the human rights field. In brief, the PNDA became some sort of consultancy board guiding the SEDH on the feasibility of the activists’ proposals. In my interview with SEDH official Eduardo Santarelo, who was one of the coordinators of the BSH, he stated that the government was actually concerned with guaranteeing institutional support and political commitment to the LGBT policies in order to avoid their non-implementation, as it had happened with the PNDH II. In other words: they learnt it was not enough to formulate policies – they should be somehow put into practice.

Following Nilmário Miranda’s recommendations, activists immediately approached the members of the CNCD and worked overnight to write down a resolution to be presented in the Council’s meeting on the next day, affirmed activist Cláudio Nascimento in interview with Daniliauskas (2011). They managed to persuade the CNCD to approve the resolution in November 2003 and establish a working group to help the SEDH in the formulation of the program, as stated by some activists during my interviews.

Spearheaded by the Associação Brasileira de Gays, Lésbicas, Bissexuais, Travestis e Transexuais (ABGLT), the working group revisited the demands of the LGBT Movement proposed over the years during its meetings and sent them to the SEDH, so it would discuss their content with the other ministries. ABGLT’s President Toni Reis explained to me that, from December 2003 until May 2004, activists met with ministries, secretariats and other agencies exposing the Movement’s proposals, educating the government officials on LGBT

31 Information provided by Ivair Augusto in interview with Daniliauskas (2011).

42 rights and convincing them on the importance of creating public policies to eliminate discrimination and violence against LGBT people. By doing this, they managed to promote more dialogue and interaction between the state and civil society, as well as instruct the latter on how the government’s structures and politics work in actual fact. If they wanted their demands to be recognized, they should know exactly how and where to claim them. In short, it was a process of mutual learning: the government would learn about LGBT rights while activists would learn about policy making. It was also a process of strengthening alliances between the Federal Government and civil society and identifying potential supporters for the LGBT program, as stated by Nascimento in interview with Daniliauskas (2011).

From the discussions made so far, it is possible to conclude that the BSH was a project proposed by the LGBT Movement and then accepted by the government. It was not Lula’s initiative, although it is uncontestable that this administration was much more receptive and willing to support them than previous administrations, as activists and SEDH officials unanimously stressed in their interviews with me. Both parts employed discursive strategies that I consider very smart due to their opportunist feature, since they took advantage of previous discursive arrangements in order to save time and accelerate the establishment of the program. On the one hand, the Moviment drew their proposals from resolutions previously agreed in their meetings, what Daniliauskas (2011) interprets as retrieval of historical LGBT demands. On the other hand, the Lula administration relied on the positive experience of bodies developed by a preceding administration (the PNDA and CNCD) to push LGBT rights into the government’s human rights agenda.

What was very ground-breaking about this program is actually the level of civil society participation, which is not merely executing state policies, as it happened during the FHC administration, but influencing directly in the policy-making and working together with the ministries. In my interview with activist Toni Reis, he argued that “for the first time in the history of the country, the LGBT Movement had the opportunity to openly discuss their demands with the whole government”, which I consider as an outcome of Lula’s discourse on building up a participatory and popular democracy.

43

4.3 The implementation of the Brasil Sem Homofobia

All activists and government officials interviewed by me agreed that the BSH can be considered a successful attempt of the Lula administration to recognize the demands of the LGBT Movement and validate them into the public policy domain. It also represents the consolidation of an important shift in the discourse of the Federal Government on LGBT Rights: they are no longer associated with AIDS and health issues, but to promotion of homosexual citizenship and elimination of homophobia. This is crystal clear on the program’s subtitle – “Program to Fight Violence and Discrimination against GLBT and Promote Homosexual Citizenship”, which reveals the government’s intention not only to protect the physical integrity of that population but uphold their position as rights-bearing citizens.

The opening letter signed by the Human Rights Secretary makes these intentions even more evident and reaffirms the government’s idea to formulate a more positive agenda for LGBT people. He frames the BSH as a fundamental tool for extending citizenship to all members of society and as a “historical symbol of the fight for the right to dignity and for the respect for diversity” (Conselho, 2004: 7). The Secretary also highlights the role of the civil society in engaging successfully with the government and considers that the public policies proposed in this program are already triumphant because they were elaborated through consensus between the Movement and 11 ministries.

While introducing the underlying principles of the BSH, the government emphasizes that the program marks the inclusion of LGBT rights in the political agenda of other ministries and secretariats, not only the Minister of Health, and will serve as a guideline for these bodies to establish and implement public policies to that population (Conselho, 2004:

11-12). I draw attention here to the government’s reaffirmation that the fight against homophobia and the protection of human rights of LGBTs have become “state commitments”

to the society. In a nutshell, the state is taking responsibility for the promotion of LGBT rights in Brazil.

The results of my content analysis indicate that the actions in the BSH stand out as a progress in the government’s discourse on LGBT rights, comparing this program with the PNDH II. While the latter contained 15 actions divided into only 4 areas³², the former was

32 Rights to freedom, equality, health and work. See 3.3 of Chapter 3.

44 composed of 53 actions to be implemented in a wide range of areas (11, in total)³³. For the purpose of this dissertation, I will focus my analysis on the actions implemented by the

44 composed of 53 actions to be implemented in a wide range of areas (11, in total)³³. For the purpose of this dissertation, I will focus my analysis on the actions implemented by the